DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

FEA model analysis of the effects of the stress distribution of saddle-type implants on the alveolar bone and the structural/physical stability of implants

  • Kong, Yoon Soo (Department of Dentistry, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gangdong Sacred Heart Hospital) ;
  • Park, Jun Woo (Department of Dentistry, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gangdong Sacred Heart Hospital) ;
  • Choi, Dong Ju (Department of Dentistry, Hallym University College of Medicine, Gangdong Sacred Heart Hospital)
  • Received : 2016.01.17
  • Accepted : 2016.02.02
  • Published : 2016.12.31

Abstract

Background: As dental implants receive masticatory stress, the distribution of stress is very important to peri-implant bone homeostasis and implant survival. In this report, we created a saddle-type implant and analyzed its stability and ability to distribute stress to the surrounding bone. Methods: The implants were designed as a saddle-type implant (SI) that wrapped around the alveolar bone, and the sizes of the saddles were 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5 mm. The X and Y displacement were compared to clarify the effects of the saddle structures. The control group consisted of dental implants without the saddle design (CI). Using finite element modeling (FEM), the stress distribution around the dental implants was analyzed. Results: With saddle-type implants, saddles longer than 4.5 mm were more effective for stress distribution than CI. Regarding lateral displacement, a SI of 2.5 mm was effective for stress distribution compared to lateral displacement. ASI that was 5.6 mm in length was more effective for stress distribution than a CI that was 10 mm in length. Conclusions: The saddle-type implant could have a bone-gaining effect. Because it has stress-distributing effects, it might protect the newly formed bone under the implant.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : Hallym University

References

  1. Lin D, Li Q, Li W, Duckmanton N, Swain M (2010) Mandibular bone remodelling induced by dental implant. J Biomech 19:287-293
  2. Lee JH, Frias V, Lee KW, Wright RF (2005) Effect of implant size and shape on implant success rates: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 94:377-381 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.04.018
  3. Lehman H, Casap N (2014) Rapid-prototype titanium bone forms for vertical alveolar augmentation using bone morphogenetic protein-2: design and treatment planning objectives. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29(2):e259-e254 https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.te62
  4. Jensen OT, Lehman H, Ringeman JL, Casap N (2014) Fabrication of printed titanium shells for containment of BMP-2 composite graft materials for alveolar bone reconstruction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29(1):e103-e105 https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.te48
  5. Renouard F, Nisand D (2006) Impact of implant length and diameter on survival rates. Clin Oral Imp Res 17(2):35-51 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01349.x
  6. Olate S, Lyrio MCN, Moraes M, Mazzonetto R, Moreira RWF (2010) Influence of diameter and length of implant on early dental implant failure. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:414-419 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.10.002
  7. Barikani H, Rashtak S, Akbari S, Fard MK, Rokn A (2014) The effect of shape, length and diameter of implants on primary stability based on reasonance frequency analysis. Dent Res J 11(1):87-91
  8. Velde T, Collaert B, Sennerby L, Bruyn H (2010) Effect of implant design on preservation of marginal bone in the mandible. Clin Implant Dentist Related Res 12(2):134-141
  9. Chung JM, Jo KH, Lee CH, Yu WJ, Lee KB (2009) Finite element analysis of peri-implant bone stress influenced by cervical module configuration of endosseous implant. J Kor Acad Prosthodont 47(4):394-404 https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2009.47.4.394
  10. Park JW, Kim SG, Choi DW, Choi MR, Yoon YJ, Park JW et al (2012) Study of a "wing-type" implant on stress distribution and bone resorption at the alveolar crest. J Korea Acad Oral Maxillofac Surg 38(6):337-342 https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2012.38.6.337
  11. Tae Sun Lee (2014) Effects of the structural change of the implant on the stress distribution to the surrounding tissues and the stability of the implant. Thesis of Hallym University. June:1-28
  12. Gaviria L, Salcido JP, Guda T, Ong JL (2014) Current trends in dental implants. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 40:50-60 https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2014.40.2.50
  13. Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A (2005) The impact of oral implants-past and future, 1966-2042. J Can Dent Assoc 71(5):327-327
  14. Jimbo R, Halldin A, Janda M, Wennerberg A, Vandeweghe S (2013) Vertical fracture and marginal bone loss of internal-connection implants: a finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 28:e171-e176 https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3052
  15. Assuncao WG, Gomes EA, Barao VAR, Sousa EAC (2009) Stress analysis in simulation models with or without implant threads representation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24:1040-1044
  16. Marce-Nogue JM, Walter A, Gil L, Puigdollers AC (2013) Finite element comparison of 10 orthodontic microscrews with different cortical bone parameters. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 28:e177-e189 https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2447
  17. Simsek B, Erkmen E, Yilmaz D, Eser A (2006) Effects of different inter-implant distances on the stress distribution around endosseous implants in posterior mandible: a 3D finite element analysis. Medical Eng Physics 28:199-213 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2005.04.025
  18. Qian L, Todo M, Matsushita Y, Koyano K (2009) Effects of implant diameter, insertion depth, and loading angle on stress/strain fields in implant/jawbone system: finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24:877-886
  19. Chang PK, Chen YC, Huang CC, Lu WH, Chen YC, Tsai HH (2012) Distribution of micromotion in implants and alveolar bone with different thread profiles in immediate loading: a finite element study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 27:e96-e102